GoodEye8

True, but the same issue happens with reddit as well, for example gaming vs games vs truegaming. Over time those communities either found their niche (gaming sub became mostly memes, games sub became news and discussions and truegaming tried to become a more serious discussing sub). Actually there were way more gaming subs but unless they found their niche they died out. So people gravitating towards specific communities is a natural occurrence.

As for trying to automatically consolidate communities across instances, it sounds like a great idea on paper but seems like technical she moderation headache, because you won't have a clear source of truth. Let's say instance A and instance B both have a community called news. The same news article with the same title is posted on both communities on both instances by different users. Assuming we want to consolidate those posts into one, which instance post will be shown or in more technical terms, which instance becomes the source of truth for that post? Who makes that decision? What if there's also instance C with the same community and the same post but that instance isn't federated with instance A, how do we consolidate posts? Each community has its own moderators and moderation rules, who is allowed to moderate the post? What if the moderation rules contradict between instances and both instances want to apply the rules independently, are they supposed to split the post?

Maybe there is an elegant solution to all the problems but I don't see there being one. I'm not against the idea, the problem is you want to solve its something I have given some thought and because of that I just don't see it working out the way you're imagining it.

User friendly is pretty vague but if we're talking about the average user who uses the computer to browse the web, play some games on Steam with friends and do some document editing that is all covered. Linux Mint would be an excellent option. The installation is arguably easier than Windows (because you won't get all those pesky telemetry and data gathering questions), visually it looks and functions similarly to Windows, most standard software is handled by a package manager so no using terminal to install things and the distro prefers stability and ease of access over fancy bells and whistles.

If there are any user issues they're most likely because of third party developer not properly supporting Linux and there's nothing Linux can do. One example is anti-cheat for games. You can't play Riot games on Linux simply because their anti-cheat won't allow you to play their games on Linux and there's nothing Linux devs can do about it.

I don't know when was the last time you used Linux but I'd say the user experience has definitely improved in the last 10 years. It's gotten to a point where I'm actually willing to recommend Linux to users whose needs I'm familiar with and know they not going to have some weird needs that need the use of a terminal.

I like to imagine they're one of those "I agree with what you're saying as long as you don't mention socialism" kind of people, except for them the big bad taboo word is patriarchy.

Some people on the internet are saying it's okay to not support Palestine because they're not pro LGBTQ enough.

It's an insane argument to make so I guess that's why OP feels like it's CIA.

Getting upvotes on my main points.

And yet every reply is in disagreement and almost every follow-up reply made by you is heavily downvoted.

People who disagree with me right now are still in a backlash phase. They’ll either listen and think about it and accommodate the obvious truth that feminism isn’t a panacea for men’s issues because that’s just stupid.

Another argument that was never made. You're the one who brought up feminism in the first place and nobody said feminism should solve men's issues.

I’m not screaming, I’m lecturing.

The lecturers I remember would address questions instead of ignoring them.

The centering of women in a topic about men’s feelings being undermined by women centering their perspective is an obvious problem. It’s not that difficult to understand that if a woman were talking over a Black woman’s experience to talk about patriarchy instead of racism, that woman would be out of line.

So if it was another woman talking over a White woman's experience that wouldn't be out of line? It wouldn't be a patriarchal issue if the person talking over had been a man instead of the woman?

The argument you're refusing to address is that the gender does not matter when it comes to patriarchy.

Your patriarchy concept isn’t working. You can’t reach men by talking about the patriarchy. Joe Rogan doesn’t talk about the patriarchy. It’s not that complicated, you just hold to your ideology hoping that if everyone nods their heads and says “yes the patriarchy is to blame” the problem will get fixed. That’s stupid.

Just because the vast majority of people are unwilling to question their beliefs does not mean the concept is wrong. That's like saying socialism is wrong because the large majority of society is taught "capitalism good, socialism bad" so they wouldn't question capitalism and would view socialism as something bad.

And once again, nobody said if everyone agree patriarchy is to blame that would solve the problem. It wouldn't, but it would at least be a step in the right direction because people would at least acknowledge there's a problem.

Anyway. I'm done with your comments. As I said in the very first comment, you're not here to listen. You just want to get on a soapbox and scream about your deeply rooted personal beliefs you refuse to question. I feel I've made my points about how you don't listen and your points are nonsense and I really have no desire to talk to you because you won't actually address the core arguments anyone is making. You'll just pile on irrelevant information to try and shift the discussion to something adjacent and it's just not worth the effort.

But people are listening to me.

I'm going to assume you meant listening (and agreeing). Because there are people listening and disagreeing, for example me. But how do you know anyone else is agreeing with you? Do you have anything empirical to show that would indicate what you believe or is it just something you want to believe?

My point is about the nature of their statement and how it centers women in a topic that is about how when men speak about feelings women center a feminine perspective.

And if you were listening instead of just screaming you'd notice that their statement does not center around women. Their argument is that patriarchal beliefs can be adopted by both women and men and in this case the patriarchal belief is that men shouldn't express their emotions and in the image it is a woman perpetuating that belief by refusing to accept what was said.

This wasn’t an invitation for you to speak up.

There wasn't an invitation for you to speak up either. But you chose to speak up so you should expect some push back. Looking at how you've presented yourself so far I seriously doubt you'll listen to me, so I'll just put my argument very plainly. Nobody should listen to you because you refuse to listen to anyone else.

You haven't addressed anything the other person has said. All you've pretty much done is try to put words in their mouth so you could counter an argument that was never made. There's no discussion here, it's just you screaming into the void and the other person wanting to believe you're a normal person.

Sure you can, because those are two different things. Feature creep applies to functionality that is there straight out the box. Add-ons are things that are built ontop of the out the box solution.

To put it in hardware, if you buy a PC then a PC is what you get out the box. If every PC had to come with a dedicated graphics card that would be a PC feature creep, because every PC doesn't need a dedicated graphics card. However, that doesn't mean you want mobo manufacturers to remove the PCIe slot, because you might want to add on (pun intended) a graphic card.

Just because I think something shouldn't be in the baseline for everyone doesn't mean I also don't want to those things to be available for the people who do want those things in their system

The water bottling company?

A company should be free to sell its game in any way at any price without any restriction coming from one vendor.

People keep bringing this up like it's some kind of a fact but any time I ask for a source I get no reply. So I'm going to ask again, can you please link the source because I've searched for it and I haven't found it.

Even home appliances don't come with the full spec technical manual. They come with the user manual so you'd know how to use your appliance, not how to fix your appliance (with the exceptions being some easy to fix user errors). When people get technical errors on their home appliances they call a technician to fix those errors, because most people lack the technical knowledge to fix things themselves. And I imagine it's the same for you. I'm pretty sure you don't fix your own car. Now imagine if you went to a mechanic to have your car fixed and they say "Just read the fucking manual and don't waste my time". What are you going to do? Read the manual that you didn't even know existed until that point and you'd first have to spend some time actually finding the manual (because some of those technical manuals are a fucking pain in the ass to find, if they're even readily available), or find another mechanic that would fix your car? What if all the mechanics tell you to go read the manual? How much of your own time would you be willing to invest into fixing an issue you didn't want to fix by yourself in the first place? What if someone offered to replace your entire car for free? Would you still spend time fixing your car or would you go "fuck it, I just need it to work"?

And that's the average Windows/Linux user. They just want an operating system that works. They don't want to understand all the technical stuff that goes on under the hood and when something breaks they want "a technician" to give them a quick solution, because knowing the inner workings of Linux is not a priority for them. Maybe they're the car mechanic that would fix your car and they've spent their time learning the inner works of a few dozen cars. People focus their time and attention on different things so getting angry at someone not wanting to learn Linux is like a car mechanic getting angry at you for not wanting to learn how your car works or a personal trainer getting angry because you don't know how your own body works etc.. Just because you know how Linux works does not mean everyone should know how Linux works.

Somehow I just knew you were going to hide behind that one word. So let me get this straight, it's not okay to hate of black people based on their skin color but it's completely okay to hate them based on how they dress?